The SitePoint Forums have moved.

You can now find them here.
This forum is now closed to new posts, but you can browse existing content.
You can find out more information about the move and how to open a new account (if necessary) here.
If you get stuck you can get support by emailing forums@sitepoint.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

There you'll find the objects, methods, events and property that specify the "outer extent" core of the dom.

If I've misread you and you actually REALLY want to know the inner core of the DOM then you'll need to go towww.w3.org - BUT - i don't think this is what you're looking for.. since this is WAY beyond what most people
here know - and if you wanted that you wouldn't have
to ask here for it

Mozilla (the web browser) is also worth mentioning for its DOM Inspector (tools->web development->DOM inspector, or ctrl-shift-I), which allows you to browse the DOM of any web page, giving you the browser's-eye view of the HTML/CSS.

I don't use it to learn anything about the DOM - I primarily use it for debugging!

However, those not so familiar with the DOM will probably find it interesting to explore the properties of all the objects and collections that are contained within. Hands-on exploration is always a good way to learn about something - in my book anyway!

I normally find debugging fairly swift in browser environments, even in our largest
and most complex internet applications you can use the
MS script debugger to find faults in any clientside scripts
in seconds if you don't see them yourself... and
i'm not sure what kind of other errors you'd be encountering?

For IE DOM, but what about the REAL DOM, W3C DOM? SImilarities...yes, but how can you program correctly without knowing the differences? Please don't leave out Netscape users (at least Mozilla/NS 6+ users).

Ah, sorry. I'm one of those people who has a major beef with the inferiority of the NS DOM, as well as NS's CSS support, and HTML rendering, and just about everything else. It just does so many things wrong (I have ZERO knowledge about NS6, and don't want it, so if it's better, I'd just rather not know) Netscape has alot of other stuff going for them. They should stop wasting decent manpower on their crappy browser that garners only twice the market share as search engine spiders and bots combined.

Competitve browsers today is stupidity. Back when both NS and MS charged $$$ for their product, it made sense, because the competition was about securing the sales dollars. But now that they are both free...why the competition? The W3C is great, but they are so slow to implement new features into standards. I know that you can't get IE on Linux, but one ofthe browsers you can (Kommander?) is better than NS on Linux from a standpoint of rendering accuracy and CSS support. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm no Microsoft advocate, and I ain't Bill Gates' nephew, but browser software is one arena where MS just has it right. They develop new and useful objects into their DOM, add cool features to CSS (like DHTML Behaviors), and powerful tools for true DHTML (like Dynamic Expressions and Visual filters) And they provide excellent support for all of it via MSDN. I have yet to find a better reference for anything (PHP, SQL, etc) that is as comprehensive as the DHTML reference I linked to above.

Originally posted by beetle Ah, sorry. I'm one of those people who has a major beef with the inferiority of the NS DOM, as well as NS's CSS support, and HTML rendering, and just about everything else. It just does so many things wrong (I have ZERO knowledge about NS6, and don't want it, so if it's better, I'd just rather not know)

Adog pointed me to this thread. Do you have any clue what you just said? You just stated that support for DOM1, most of DOM2, and even a DOM3 interface, the best support for CSS1 and CSS2 anywhere, CSS3 selectors, and the only browser other than Amaya to support XHTML 1.1 is worse than IE, which supports DOM1, some CSS2 (not the useful parts), and only XHTML 1.0 transitional?

Have you ever used any Gecko-based browser? (You admitted to never using NS6). If you are basing your assumptions on the current "Netscape" - you are so wrong it isn't even funny. I can understand you though if you are thinking about NS4. Try NS7, or grab the latest Mozilla build from www.mozilla.org.

The W3C is great, but they are so slow to implement new features into standards.

I know that you can't get IE on Linux, but one ofthe browsers you can (Kommander?) is better than NS on Linux from a standpoint of rendering accuracy and CSS support.

How can you say that when you've never even used Konqueror? It is nice, but I even prefer IE to it, which says A LOT.

They develop new and useful objects into their DOM, add cool features to CSS (like DHTML Behaviors), and powerful tools for true DHTML (like Dynamic Expressions and Visual filters)

At the cost of spending time implemented standards. DHTML behaviors are nice, and W3C currently has no "standard" equivalent. The CSS3 Behavoral Extensions module should fix that though. There are better alternatives to behaviors though. Gecko (NS6+, Mozilla, Galeon, K-meleon, and Beonex to name some browsers) support XBL (eXtensible Binding Language), which is a W3C Note and is setup in a superior way than behaviors. The only thing really missing from XBL (bugs - specs define them, but currently aren't implemented) are a global namespace, and the ability to dynamically remove a binding efficiently.

And they provide excellent support for all of it via MSDN. I have yet to find a better reference for anything (PHP, SQL, etc) that is as comprehensive as the DHTML reference I linked to above.

MSDN is nice, I'll be the first to admit it.

I'm sorry if I sounded furious, or acted like a troll, but it is because of people with the exact mindset of yours that the web is in such sorry shape. If you don't use IE on Windows, you are left out of too much. Considering IE on Windows is one of the poorest browser/platforms you can choose, that says something.

Hey, no ill will. All in the name of good controversy! Yes, I can only base my knowledge off my personal experiences and those related to me by people I trust...and quite frankly don't have the time to learn. I think my point is best made by this fact: Look at hom many current posts in this forum alone deal with NS-only problems. Heres a link with some recent data to back me up. As you can see, almost half of Netscape users still use 4.x

I appreciate your knowledge and position, and would like to learn more about Gecko-based browsers, but until their market-share increases, it's not going to do me much good. Most of the sites I work on are for small/medium sized business, and they simply do not have the budget/concern for developing what should be 1 website for multiple platforms. ("Yes Mr. Johnson, we can get you an 8% larger audience with an extra 40% investment in time and money.") Hence the source of my frustration, because Mr. Johnson's Mom or somebody else he knows uses Netscape, but he doesn't want to pay to have every line of code typed twice (and I don't blame him) It may be good for competition and development, but it's bad news for us freelancers who are unfortunate to live in an area where the market won't support bloated development costs.

Originally posted by beetle he doesn't want to pay to have every line of code typed twice (and I don't blame him) It may be good for competition and development, but it's bad news for us freelancers who are unfortunate to live in an area where the market won't support bloated development costs.

This is why web standards are NECESSARY. Think about this for a moment. W3C defines free, open, well-documented specifications for browsers to implement. Often times giving suggestions to user agents on how to implement them directly in the document. (Read CSS3 Color Module for an example of HSL, and W3C providing code to help).

With that established, any browser can come along and view pages coded to web standards fine.

I could be using Mozilla, you IE, someone Opera, someone else, Konqueror, and someone UnreleasedFictionBrowser 2.0. As long as these browsers implemented web standards, guess what? Your code will only be written once, and rendered identically across all compliant browsers and platforms.

If IE better supported web standards, nobody would be complaining that Gecko doesn't support IE-only code. Does the term "IE-only" have any meaning to people who complain? It is easier for everyone (including Microsoft) to implement already specified and well defined specs, rather than create their own, which leads me to believe [b]Microsoft is purposely making the developer's life harder[b]. (Of course, by doing this they are locking you into proprietary implementations - IE - as the only resort for ease.)

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty sure IE does support all the web standards (if not, please cordially point me to someplace where I can read what they don't, so I'll know). I think what you are trying to say is that they should support the standards and ONLY the standards. This goes back to what I said a couple posts ago....competition has made things worse in this arena. Microsoft for some reason feels the need to develop and support a whole slew of additional features? Why? I'm not sure. Maybe they think the standard sucks. Maybe they'd rather be in control of the standards like they are with everything else. All I can say is that the numbers speak and I must listen. If not, I cannot always deliver to clients' and their clients' expectations. (In other words, becuase I don't think anyone here gets it yet, I'm looking at this subject from business standpoint, not a preference standpoint) Like a politician (please, no dirty politician references/jokes) I must speak for the opinion of my public, and my public has spoken. It uses IE. Oh, and don't talk to me about MathML and XSLT, because last time I checked, this was a DHTML/javascript forum, not a W3C recommendations forum